Kill Chain by Andrew Cockburn
Should you believe in the old adage “if you like sausages don’t watch them being made” and you believe that war is sometimes necessary don’t read this polemic. Mr. Cockburn is thoroughly of the opinion that senior officers should not have the slightest idea of what is happening on the battlefield and their attempts to so discern events is futile, unrewarding and expensive. Being one of the elite of journalists he is very inclined to toss off remarks such as “the general told me specifically that...” and we are supposed to believe that his conclusion taken from such remarks are gospel and certainly not hearsay.
I am of the Viet Nam war and I am very used to the snarky and frequently incorrect reportage of the elite journalists and those who emulate them. One of their favorite memes was to quote the black humor that those of us at the point of the spear used to blunt reality, as though it were gospel. And Mr Cockburn does not disappoint. Captains appear to assure us that the commanders have no idea of what is happening, Colonels, whom we are told are called “Sun Tzu” by their compatriots, provide us with keen insight on experimental programs as the military attempts to keep up with technology and the ancient rite of the guerrilla - all rotten to the core in their personal opinion. And since this reflects Mr. Cockburn’s bias it is handed down as though that Chinese Sage had pronounced it himself.
The author is firmly convinced that experimental approaches to command and control, COIN or Counter Insurgency (that ancient term found in the jargon of early examinations of fighting the disappearing enemy albeit an apparent revelation to him because it was used by someone he disliked) should not be undertaken
Overall an interesting book written by one who understands that war is hell but has no interest in telling us how he would wage it. He is a bean-counter and attempts to appear authoritative by simply being verbose, telling the same story several times. In fact I got the impression he was cutting and pasting from various articles he had previously written and perhaps forgot what he had said in the previous chapter. But then he is a luminary in the field of journalism and perhaps that is considered de rigeur.
